i don't knwo what is wrong with some of you. We are goinf to buy a dozzen of these things right off the bat. The 20" model will make a great freelance machine for graphics. I'm talking about Quark, Indesign, Illustrator and, yes, Photoshop.
This seems like some BS, doesn't it? Here's the things that just don't make any sense:
1. The video specs are wrong - period. It would be disastrous to release that.
2. Digital audio out that doesn't support Dolby? Huh? Apple is indeed a licensed Dolby Manufacturer. Give me a f***ing break!
3. Vertical Superdrives? Hmm, thought that was not possible.
4. $1,300 for an EDU model? Apple has said (I believe it was Fred Anderson, at the last quarterly financial report) that the iMac was overpriced and were going to cut prices.
The specs are fine with the exception of the graphics card. It looks TS is mistaking the GeForce FX series graphics cards with the GeForce4 MX series graphics card throughout the whole article. The current out-of-stock 17+ inch iMacs have a GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics cards, and the 15 inch model has GeForce4 MX. So maybe TS is confusing the new models with the old models here. I think if Apple is sticking with Nvidia, the FX 5200 Ultra would be the bottom end for new machines.
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices. Anything above $1500 for a single purchase is simply out-of-reach for most people in the consumer market. For the millionth time, Apple really needs, presuming they care about the market, a headless desktop for <$1000 and a 15"/17" monitors for $300 to $400.
Surely 5200fx will be the bottom card. Here's praying!!! If it's veiled in that much secrecy maybe TS will update the article nearer lauch time.
They surely CAN'T be the specs of an Apple consumer machine as we head into 2005!!!?
I liked your last bit. Why can't Apple just give us 17 and 15 inch alu versions of their very sexy monitors for between £200 and £350? ... and headless units units from £595-£1095?
How hard is it? They've done the work.
Putting it together?
Is it tooooooo simple?
Clicks ruby red heels and dreams for THT's comments to come true...
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Say, where's Amorph...? AIO whining matches are no fun without Amorph...
I'm going to pour some more fuel on this fire. While Think Secret has been very accurate on their specs for upcoming Macs, they've always been low on the price.
So here we go ladies and gentlemen, be prepared for the TRUE insanity to be shown.
Apple has kept pushing up the baseline price of all their products. The low end PowerMac used to be $1599 and while the rest of the market is shedding hundreds of dollars from prices the low end PowerMac is now... $1999, and yes that is with an Nvidia 5200 Ultra.
Think Secret was a bit smarter this time and left themselves some room for the pricing, room to go higher of course.
I'm betting that the $1299 edition will be the optical-less educational edition. I'm betting that the low end iMac will be listed at $1599 retail.
You heard me. $1599. Does it make any sense? Does anything at Apple these days?
Edit: From the article...
Quote:
The entry-level consumer iMac will have the same specs of the 17-inch educational model, but with a slot-loading Combo drive, 80GB Serial ATA hard drive, NVIDIA GeForce MX 5200 Ultra graphics processor with 64MB of DDR video memory, and a 56K internal modem.
Realize that any current PowerMac 1.6's out there are still going for $1599. (I don't know who is crazy enough to pay for them but still that is the Apple Minimum Suggested Retail Pricing) Thus Apple will be able to say that you are getting what you received before in the PowerMac, but now with a 17 inch LCD monitor.
These specs if even close will not grow marketshare for Apple. in fact by getting so carried away with monitors and all in ones this machine will almost make sure that market will be lost. we all know iMac has to be crippled because of Powermac but having such poor video means this machine will chase away buyers. Apple has taken its eye off the ball and is still chasing the failure of all in ones. This machine seems to be a step backwards from current iMac except for its cpu. looking at hard drive,memory and video this thing is going to be a looser big time when it comes to market share. are they trying to kill the iMac? i would say yes.
Sure, you are right... however... I don't know how much you have followed Think Secret's predictions and reports, but people here have a very valid reason to worry. Think Secret has such a good reputation as a rumor site, that when they say something, it is almost a given it will be so.
I am afraid that Apple will screw it badly this time. And it will be no next big chance for Apple's anniversary year before the end of this year. Unless they plan to release something completely different and the Think Secret report is 100% out of phase.
Yeah, Think Secret is usually spot-on. I think this is one of the first times that I'm hoping they're wrong! But I'm equally as worried that Apple will screw this one up.
Needs a 160GB HD - my 80GB is way too small, and I'm deleting stuff all the time.
It's not that with a 5200 it wouldn't be able to play games etc, it matters when customers see a mac next to a pc, and the imac specs are practically half as good as the pcs. I've seen this happen, and customers just stay away for that exact reason. It needs to be competitive, doesn't matter if you get a built in LCD, it still needs to have the goods.
If these are the real specs the new iMac has "flop" written all over it.
A new form factor means it needs a serious hardware upgrade as well, and this according to TS won't be delivered.
Gaming? No serious gamer is going to be looking at the Mac anyway... and I still maintain your money is better spent on a console.
Had the iMac's graphic card been enough for casual gaming, I wouldn't be whining. The 5200 is barely enough to play three year old games. 9600 XT with 128MB VRAM. Like in the PowerMac he 9600 is an upgrade that'd cost consumers 50$ (compared to the 5200), and Apple probably a lot less.
The cube returns! and not in a good way. It's the same thing all over again. High price + cool design + not up to date internals = a poor selling failure.
Merge the Register story with the one from ThinkSecret and you end up with an iMac3 that would be truly revolutionary. If the iMac3 came with a detachable tablet-like screen, then the assumed price points would seem modest.
Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.
i believe the only person with the same old whine is you.
Quote:
1. The video specs are wrong - period. It would be disastrous to release that.
2. Digital audio out that doesn't support Dolby? Huh? Apple is indeed a licensed Dolby Manufacturer. Give me a f***ing break!
3. Vertical Superdrives? Hmm, thought that was not possible.
4. $1,300 for an EDU model? Apple has said (I believe it was Fred Anderson, at the last quarterly financial report) that the iMac was overpriced and were going to cut prices.
1. not disastrous, just not good. i don't expect them to release an imac with better graphics than their towers anyways. and the towers, the low end at least, has shitty graphics.
2. I'm pretty sure they mean processing inside and outputting as a 5.1 decoded stream? i don't know. the powermac outputs fine so I am not worried and instead excited that optical is now on the iMac...or will be
3. i guess we'll find out
4. Thinksecret is unclear as to the edu price. the emac will still be around, as will the iBook. education should not be a concern with this product.
I'm just pointing out the fact that unverified specs are posted and the barage of negativism from the same people begins. Why not wait until the real specs are revealed. I use my "lousy" 17" iMac to design artwork, make CDRs, surf the net, and download photos and other things. I've made iMovies and DVDs on my iMac. It fits its purpose for me. It's kind of funny that PC centric magazines and writers are more inamored with the iMac then so-called Apple "supporters". When the current model came out it got great reviews. Certainly the iMac is not for everyone. But you have another choice called the PowerMac.
Also, Think Secret has not always been perfect/correct in their advanced pronouncements by the way.
In the end, wait until it's time, then whine if you don't like something!
I'm just pointing out the fact that unverified specs are posted and the barage of negativism from the same people begins. Why not wait until the real specs are revealed. I use my "lousy" 17" iMac to design artwork, make CDRs, surf the net, and download photos and other things. I've made iMovies and DVDs on my iMac. It fits its purpose for me. It's kind of funny that PC centric magazines and writers are more inamored with the iMac then so-called Apple "supporters". When the current model came out it got great reviews. Certainly the iMac is not for everyone. But you have another choice called the PowerMac.
Also, Think Secret has not always been perfect/correct in their advanced pronouncements by the way.
In the end, wait until it's time, then whine if you don't like something!
you can do all the things you said on an iMac from 2 years ago. Just because all of that is possible does not mean Apple does not have an obligation to improve performance....maybe even to a level where most people won't benefit from it.
Apple basically contradicts themselves. When they talk software they say the GPU is the future, alleviates all the CPU problems, the faster the better, can do all these cool real time effects that mere mortals will benefit from. And they when they talk hardware, they give you the bare minimum.
that all goes for the low end though. the high end imac does not compare well at all to the competition and is clearly where apple is killing us by their margin greed
Comments
1. The video specs are wrong - period. It would be disastrous to release that.
2. Digital audio out that doesn't support Dolby? Huh? Apple is indeed a licensed Dolby Manufacturer. Give me a f***ing break!
3. Vertical Superdrives? Hmm, thought that was not possible.
4. $1,300 for an EDU model? Apple has said (I believe it was Fred Anderson, at the last quarterly financial report) that the iMac was overpriced and were going to cut prices.
If it smells like a rat....
The specs are fine with the exception of the graphics card. It looks TS is mistaking the GeForce FX series graphics cards with the GeForce4 MX series graphics card throughout the whole article. The current out-of-stock 17+ inch iMacs have a GeForce FX 5200 Ultra graphics cards, and the 15 inch model has GeForce4 MX. So maybe TS is confusing the new models with the old models here. I think if Apple is sticking with Nvidia, the FX 5200 Ultra would be the bottom end for new machines.
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices. Anything above $1500 for a single purchase is simply out-of-reach for most people in the consumer market. For the millionth time, Apple really needs, presuming they care about the market, a headless desktop for <$1000 and a 15"/17" monitors for $300 to $400.
Surely 5200fx will be the bottom card. Here's praying!!! If it's veiled in that much secrecy maybe TS will update the article nearer lauch time.
They surely CAN'T be the specs of an Apple consumer machine as we head into 2005!!!?
I liked your last bit. Why can't Apple just give us 17 and 15 inch alu versions of their very sexy monitors for between £200 and £350? ... and headless units units from £595-£1095?
How hard is it? They've done the work.
Putting it together?
Is it tooooooo simple?
Clicks ruby red heels and dreams for THT's comments to come true...
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Say, where's Amorph...? AIO whining matches are no fun without Amorph...
i don't knwo what is wrong with some of you.
Read the thinksecret link again...
Lemon Bon Bon
$1,300 for an EDU model?
aheh...not a dry eye in the house...
Lemon Bon Bon
So here we go ladies and gentlemen, be prepared for the TRUE insanity to be shown.
Apple has kept pushing up the baseline price of all their products. The low end PowerMac used to be $1599 and while the rest of the market is shedding hundreds of dollars from prices the low end PowerMac is now... $1999, and yes that is with an Nvidia 5200 Ultra.
Think Secret was a bit smarter this time and left themselves some room for the pricing, room to go higher of course.
I'm betting that the $1299 edition will be the optical-less educational edition. I'm betting that the low end iMac will be listed at $1599 retail.
You heard me. $1599. Does it make any sense? Does anything at Apple these days?
Edit: From the article...
The entry-level consumer iMac will have the same specs of the 17-inch educational model, but with a slot-loading Combo drive, 80GB Serial ATA hard drive, NVIDIA GeForce MX 5200 Ultra graphics processor with 64MB of DDR video memory, and a 56K internal modem.
Realize that any current PowerMac 1.6's out there are still going for $1599. (I don't know who is crazy enough to pay for them but still that is the Apple Minimum Suggested Retail Pricing) Thus Apple will be able to say that you are getting what you received before in the PowerMac, but now with a 17 inch LCD monitor.
I'll bet I'm dead on.
Nick
Originally posted by THT
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices.
Originally posted by THT
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices.
Originally posted by THT
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices.
Originally posted by THT
The problem will undoubtedly be the prices.
1,000,004th time
Originally posted by PB
Sure, you are right... however... I don't know how much you have followed Think Secret's predictions and reports, but people here have a very valid reason to worry. Think Secret has such a good reputation as a rumor site, that when they say something, it is almost a given it will be so.
I am afraid that Apple will screw it badly this time. And it will be no next big chance for Apple's anniversary year before the end of this year. Unless they plan to release something completely different and the Think Secret report is 100% out of phase.
Yeah, Think Secret is usually spot-on. I think this is one of the first times that I'm hoping they're wrong! But I'm equally as worried that Apple will screw this one up.
Current iMac specs..
$1,799.00 \t
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.25GHz PowerPC G4
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR333 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
SuperDrive
Apple Pro Speakers
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Option
Again crappy has hell but Jobs will say, yeah but you how have a 64 bit 1.6 G5 and it is $200 cheaper.
Mark my words.... sucktacular.
Nick
Originally posted by Aurora
These specs if even close will not grow marketshare for Apple.
<sarcasm>I could have sworn that Apple stated that they wanted to increase market share, so you must be mistaken.<sarcasm>
I sincerely hope that ThinkSecret got bad information.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
aheh...not a dry eye in the house...
Lemon Bon Bon
Yeah suddenly a jump from the $599 entry level pricing to $1299???? Additional $700!?!?!? This is a load of crap! Not believing a word of it.
Needs a Radeon 9600 at the bottom end.
Needs a Radeon 9600XT at the top end.
Needs a 160GB HD - my 80GB is way too small, and I'm deleting stuff all the time.
It's not that with a 5200 it wouldn't be able to play games etc, it matters when customers see a mac next to a pc, and the imac specs are practically half as good as the pcs. I've seen this happen, and customers just stay away for that exact reason. It needs to be competitive, doesn't matter if you get a built in LCD, it still needs to have the goods.
If these are the real specs the new iMac has "flop" written all over it.
A new form factor means it needs a serious hardware upgrade as well, and this according to TS won't be delivered.
Originally posted by Kickaha
For what, pray tell?
Seriously.
Gaming? No serious gamer is going to be looking at the Mac anyway... and I still maintain your money is better spent on a console.
Had the iMac's graphic card been enough for casual gaming, I wouldn't be whining. The 5200 is barely enough to play three year old games. 9600 XT with 128MB VRAM. Like in the PowerMac he 9600 is an upgrade that'd cost consumers 50$ (compared to the 5200), and Apple probably a lot less.
The Register has a story about a trademark filing in Europe that concerns a so-called tablet Mac.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08...le_tablet_mac/
Merge the Register story with the one from ThinkSecret and you end up with an iMac3 that would be truly revolutionary. If the iMac3 came with a detachable tablet-like screen, then the assumed price points would seem modest.
Perhaps I've had too much coffee this morning!
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
Doesn't anybody here use computers for things other then games? This is the same old same whine. Buy a console as suggested and let the computer be used for useful, productive things.
i believe the only person with the same old whine is you.
1. The video specs are wrong - period. It would be disastrous to release that.
2. Digital audio out that doesn't support Dolby? Huh? Apple is indeed a licensed Dolby Manufacturer. Give me a f***ing break!
3. Vertical Superdrives? Hmm, thought that was not possible.
4. $1,300 for an EDU model? Apple has said (I believe it was Fred Anderson, at the last quarterly financial report) that the iMac was overpriced and were going to cut prices.
1. not disastrous, just not good. i don't expect them to release an imac with better graphics than their towers anyways. and the towers, the low end at least, has shitty graphics.
2. I'm pretty sure they mean processing inside and outputting as a 5.1 decoded stream? i don't know. the powermac outputs fine so I am not worried and instead excited that optical is now on the iMac...or will be
3. i guess we'll find out
4. Thinksecret is unclear as to the edu price. the emac will still be around, as will the iBook. education should not be a concern with this product.
Also, Think Secret has not always been perfect/correct in their advanced pronouncements by the way.
In the end, wait until it's time, then whine if you don't like something!
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
I'm just pointing out the fact that unverified specs are posted and the barage of negativism from the same people begins. Why not wait until the real specs are revealed. I use my "lousy" 17" iMac to design artwork, make CDRs, surf the net, and download photos and other things. I've made iMovies and DVDs on my iMac. It fits its purpose for me. It's kind of funny that PC centric magazines and writers are more inamored with the iMac then so-called Apple "supporters". When the current model came out it got great reviews. Certainly the iMac is not for everyone. But you have another choice called the PowerMac.
Also, Think Secret has not always been perfect/correct in their advanced pronouncements by the way.
In the end, wait until it's time, then whine if you don't like something!
you can do all the things you said on an iMac from 2 years ago. Just because all of that is possible does not mean Apple does not have an obligation to improve performance....maybe even to a level where most people won't benefit from it.
Apple basically contradicts themselves. When they talk software they say the GPU is the future, alleviates all the CPU problems, the faster the better, can do all these cool real time effects that mere mortals will benefit from. And they when they talk hardware, they give you the bare minimum.
that all goes for the low end though. the high end imac does not compare well at all to the competition and is clearly where apple is killing us by their margin greed